Did NASA Fake the Mars Rovers?

Why are you assuming communication in space (ie: a vacuum) is similar to communication on earth?

In space they are communicating with laser pulses, microwaves and radio waves. Its not as if the Rovers are pin point sending messages back to NASA.
The "Deep Space Network" which is situated in three different locations through out the globe are set up to catch the Rovers messages.

My old man always said "think before you open your mouth" I pass this little pearl of wisdom too you, along with "best to stay silent and have them
think you're a fool than too open your mouth and dispel all doubt"

You don't think NASA took the risk of Space debris into account before they launched? You are aware NASA employs hundreds of scientists right? Sorry
but I think they know a little more about how to get a rover to mars than you or I ever will.

It's far more easy to fake a mission to Mars than to actually do it. And technology could make it appear quite real.

I'm not saying it was or wasn't but that both possibilities exist. And that to believe either is merely a choice of perception.

Because to be honest. You weren't there when the rover was designed, you weren't there when it was loaded up as cargo for the flight. You weren't
there when it deployed. You weren't there in the mission control room. You weren't there when they piled through all the astrophysics required to
even conceive the idea.

Most people just trust that people in authority are offering valid statements and conclusions and trust that they wouldn't lie.

But in reality all of us base our mental constructs upon the ideas of others, not our own observations.

In fact what would be the point of faking the Mars rover at all? Other than scientific inquiry there's no point to what NASA does anymore.

Remember that one of the main reasons put forward for going to the moon was to beat the Russians. Who exactly is NASA trying to beat now? Why exactly
would they fake the mars rover? Its of no political or scientific benefit to fake it. I just don't see why they would...

In fact what would be the point of faking the Mars rover at all? Other than scientific inquiry there's no point to what NASA does anymore.

Remember that one of the main reasons put forward for going to the moon was to beat the Russians. Who exactly is NASA trying to beat now? Why exactly
would they fake the mars rover? Its of no political or scientific benefit to fake it. I just don't see why they would...

You really don't see the point to faking something like this? It's not about "beating" or upstaging someone.

It's about guiding industry to new technologies you wish to harness and develop under the guise of a program actually doing something.

The ESA has ION PROPULSION ENGINES. We still use LIQUIDS in America. Space exploration or lack thereof stimulates new technological growth.

Yes the rover is on mars. It takes 13 hours to send and receive data and directions and there is only a brief window each day when the satellite
orbiting marts can transfer data back and forth between the earth and the rover. Also, it is rumored that there is a secret quantum communications
radio on the rover which could provide almost instantaneous data transfer.

It's far more easy to fake a mission to Mars than to actually do it. And technology could make it appear quite real.

I'm not saying it was or wasn't but that both possibilities exist. And that to believe either is merely a choice of perception.

Because to be honest. You weren't there when the rover was designed, you weren't there when it was loaded up as cargo for the flight. You weren't
there when it deployed. You weren't there in the mission control room. You weren't there when they piled through all the astrophysics required to
even conceive the idea.

Most people just trust that people in authority are offering valid statements and conclusions and trust that they wouldn't lie.

But in reality all of us base our mental constructs upon the ideas of others, not our own observations.

This idea is flawed and not acceptable!
NASA allows you to observer the process.

To spark the thoughts of the process leads to the misleading vividness of the program.

The spotlight effect is helping with acceptance of the belief in the program.

Give the viewers of the threads names for most people!

If I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that's a private rover then the picture is a photo shop fake.
I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that's a private rover.
Therefore, the picture is a photo shop fake.

It's far more easy to fake a mission to Mars than to actually do it. And technology could make it appear quite real.

I'm not saying it was or wasn't but that both possibilities exist. And that to believe either is merely a choice of perception.

Because to be honest. You weren't there when the rover was designed, you weren't there when it was loaded up as cargo for the flight. You weren't
there when it deployed. You weren't there in the mission control room. You weren't there when they piled through all the astrophysics required to
even conceive the idea.

Most people just trust that people in authority are offering valid statements and conclusions and trust that they wouldn't lie.

But in reality all of us base our mental constructs upon the ideas of others, not our own observations.

This idea is flawed and not acceptable!
NASA allows you to observer the process.

To spark the thoughts of the process leads to the misleading vividness of the program.

The spotlight effect is helping with acceptance of the belief in the program.

Give the viewers of the threads names for most people!

If I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that comes from a private rover hidden from the public then the picture is a photo shop
fake.
I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that comes from a private rover hidden from the public.
Therefore, the picture is a photo shop fake.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by Erad3]

You're idea is flawed and not acceptable!

Watching something shoot into the air, isn't the same as BEING THERE INSIDE OF IT. You have no idea what happens once it leaves your vision. And
that's IF you're actually there at the launch.

If you're watching it on TV, you have absolutely no idea what is going. You don't know if what you're watching is real. You simply assume it is.

Originally posted by kadyr80
Yes the rover is on mars. It takes 13 hours to send and receive data and directions and there is only a brief window each day when the satellite
orbiting marts can transfer data back and forth between the earth and the rover. Also, it is rumored that there is a secret quantum communications
radio on the rover which could provide almost instantaneous data transfer.

The Deep Space Network (DSN) is one of the largest telecommunications systems in the world.

So, each rover carries 3 much smaller antennas — one that can move in different directions called the high gain antenna, and two others that are
fixed — the low gain and Ultra High Frequency (UHF) antennas.

This information provided is misleading from the standpoint of the atmosphere and weather conditions of mars.

They're testing the signal without the knowledge of the weather and atmosphere.

This information provided is misleading from the standpoint of the atmosphere and weather conditions of mars.

They're testing the signal without the knowledge of the weather and atmosphere.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by Erad3]

2001 Mars Odyssey is a robotic spacecraft orbiting the planet Mars.

This is only 1 of the orbiting satellites of several, you'd figure they can observe the weather and atmospheric conditions...

But as we all can see by now, anything we link or show and present you with you claim to be fake, since none of us is sitting in mars at the moment...
Nothing in internet is true, everything is false. Atleast i get this image from you.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.